Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Trade] Canucks Trade for Dickinson from DAL for a 3rd.


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, lmm said:

I absolutely cherry pick who I respond to

I respond to people who answer my questions 

or 

who back up their arguements

I have little time for ranters

and people who respond with bags, how many is that today, you have given me 5-6 bags?  very thoughtful responses, so very worthy of my response

you seem to think there has been some EVIDENCE that I am wrong, but I don't see any more evidence that he is hard to play against than I have seen he is easy to put on his backside. In both instances it is a very small sample size, so again, I will say, I'll wait til the season starts

 

.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................place bag here>___

You are wrong. You are just twisting your definitions of "playing hard against" to fit your narrative. You're also not listening to those who obviously know more than you.

https://thecanuckway.com/2021/07/17/canucks-acquire-jason-dickinson-from-the-dallas-stars/

 

Analytically-speaking, Dickinson should fit in quite nicely in the Canucks’ bottom-six. He fills the heft card at 6’2″ and 200 pounds, and brings strong forecheck and sound defensive fundamentals to the table. He finished last season with a faceoff winning percentage of just 47.91%, but has steadily improved over the past two years. Dickinson also registered 40 blocked shots, 21 takeaways and 12 drawn penalties over 51 games, while he posting a CF/60 rating of 50.1 in all situations.
 

 

 

From here: Dallas fans

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, lmm said:

skipping Motte

I really don't get the Demko/Horvat deals compared to the Boeser deal.

I think the Demko/Horvat deals are good, but structured weird, not bad  weird, just weird.

Then the Boeser deal looks bad by comparison

as I think I understand it, Boeser needs to qualified at $8.25 while Horvat and Demko can be qualified below $6

but ya, Demko til 2026 looks like a steal

If Boeser continues to score at .4 goals per game, is he worth $8.25 ?

I definitely like the Horvat/Demko deals better than Boeser's

Isn’t BBs qualifying offer 7.5m though not 8.25. Plus he will be an RFA and arbitration eligible so the team could potentially push for that and get a potential 15% cut to bring him down 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

 

I think this is the first year in a long time where we have just about all of our picks for this coming draft minus the third round pick for the Dickinson trade? 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I think this is the first year in a long time where we have just about all of our picks for this coming draft minus the third round pick for the Dickinson trade? 

We have 7 picks... 

1 (van)

2 (van)

5 (chi-Bowie for our 4th)

5 (van)

6 (win-jordie benn)

6 (van)

7 (van)

 

So no 3rd or 4th but and extra 5th and 6th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, coryberg said:

We have 7 picks... 

1 (van)

2 (van)

5 (chi-Bowie for our 4th)

5 (van)

6 (win-jordie benn)

6 (van)

7 (van)

 

So no 3rd or 4th but and extra 5th and 6th

Oh that’s pretty good. The more picks the better! I wonder if Jim is able to get a few more picks. Who’d be on the block for that to happen though? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

You are wrong. You are just twisting your definitions of "playing hard against" to fit your narrative. You're also not listening to those who obviously know more than you.

https://thecanuckway.com/2021/07/17/canucks-acquire-jason-dickinson-from-the-dallas-stars/

 

Analytically-speaking, Dickinson should fit in quite nicely in the Canucks’ bottom-six. He fills the heft card at 6’2″ and 200 pounds, and brings strong forecheck and sound defensive fundamentals to the table. He finished last season with a faceoff winning percentage of just 47.91%, but has steadily improved over the past two years. Dickinson also registered 40 blocked shots, 21 takeaways and 12 drawn penalties over 51 games, while he posting a CF/60 rating of 50.1 in all situations.
 

 

 

From here: Dallas fans

 

Thanks for the share of the Stars fans. Sounds like the guys gives it his all, is super reliable and versatile and is an absolute fan favorite. Everyone seemed to reffer to him as a 3C as well, so people who were curious if he'd be a winger or C for us will like that. Based off the fact that he is constantly eating pucks, hits, and kills it defensively I definitely think he will make this team harder to play against. Despite what a couple negative Nancy's around here have to say on the subject. Really pumped we picked him up.

  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

Oh that’s pretty good. The more picks the better! I wonder if Jim is able to get a few more picks. Who’d be on the block for that to happen though? 

We had 4th liners and bottom-pairing D on our protection list.

 

We don't have any expendable players that are worth anything.

 

The main roster players we want to get rid of would require us to add picks, not the other way around.

  • RoughGame 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, lmm said:

skipping Motte

I really don't get the Demko/Horvat deals compared to the Boeser deal.

I think the Demko/Horvat deals are good, but structured weird, not bad  weird, just weird.

Then the Boeser deal looks bad by comparison

as I think I understand it, Boeser needs to qualified at $8.25 while Horvat and Demko can be qualified below $6

but ya, Demko til 2026 looks like a steal

If Boeser continues to score at .4 goals per game, is he worth $8.25 ?

I definitely like the Horvat/Demko deals better than Boeser's

Boeser would have been a 7x7 deal without a bridge. We got him at 5.8. That's a great number... also gave us flexibility if he continued to be injury prone (looks like we are safe) I have no problem signing him at 7.5 (that's how I see his QO) moving forward. That's a good deal in my books.

 

Don't see anything wierd about bo's contract. No signing bonus' just straight salary at 5.5 mil.... if he was UFA he would get 7 million all day.

Edited by coryberg
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

Oh that’s pretty good. The more picks the better! I wonder if Jim is able to get a few more picks. Who’d be on the block for that to happen though? 

From the sounds of it we might be able to get a pick by retaining on Holtby 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Unless we’re trading Schmidt or retaining salary on Holbty I don’t see how we’re getting a pick back.


I think this is a case of Benning overvaluing his trade chips again.

 

A little presumptive don’t u think, Bobby D? There’s a number of trades that could  still be completed to secure a 3rd pick, or better, in return. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Unless we’re trading Schmidt or retaining salary on Holbty I don’t see how we’re getting a pick back.


I think this is a case of Benning overvaluing his trade chips again.

 

It sounded like there was a fair bit of interest in Holtby leading up to the roster freeze.  There could be a few teams looking for a veteran goalie as a backup or as a #1B in a platoon with a younger #1A.  The candidates would be teams already looking for goaltending and whoever ends up losing a goalie in expansion.

 

I'm curious about Schmidt.  As much as Schmidt departing would leave a giant hole in the Canucks D, freeing up that cap space would give the Canucks much more flexibility.  Maybe the Canucks are OK with giving Schmidt up for a 3rd since that was their cost of acquiring him.  Schmidt didn't have a good year last year but if he bounces back, then either the Canucks or whatever team he is traded to should have a solid top-4 D.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

We had 4th liners and bottom-pairing D on our protection list.

 

We don't have any expendable players that are worth anything.

 

The main roster players we want to get rid of would require us to add picks, not the other way around.

Sounds awfully like NYI, yet unlike them, Benning didn't have to give up picks to get rid of a contract. HMM...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Unless we’re trading Schmidt or retaining salary on Holbty I don’t see how we’re getting a pick back.


I think this is a case of Benning overvaluing his trade chips again.

 

Not really. The quote doesn't actually say anything about him having trade leverage or not. He just said he's prepared for anything. If a trade doesn't happen to recoup the pick, then he doesn't do it.


It makes you wonder what the value of Gaudette was... if Benning could've gotten ANY pick of some kind, I think he would've done it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dazzle said:

Not really. The quote doesn't actually say anything about him having trade leverage or not. He just said he's prepared for anything. If a trade doesn't happen to recoup the pick, then he doesn't do it.


It makes you wonder what the value of Gaudette was... if Benning could've gotten ANY pick of some kind, I think he would've done it.

Well the idea that we can recoup any sort of picks seems unlikely when we’re gonna be the ones paying to unload players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

Isn’t BBs qualifying offer 7.5m though not 8.25. Plus he will be an RFA and arbitration eligible so the team could potentially push for that and get a potential 15% cut to bring him down 

I thought it was final year salary +10% 

$7.5 + $750 = $825

arbitration seems like a good way to create bad blood

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...